MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Regulation of moth–yucca mutualisms: mortality of eggs in oviposition‐induced ‘damage zones’

2003· article· en· W2103024788 on OpenAlexaff
Judith M. Shapiro, John F. Addicott

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology Letters · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsYuccaPredationBiologyLimitingEcologyPollination

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Pollination–seed predation mutualisms such as moth–yucca interactions are important model systems for studying mechanisms that limit exploitation when mutualistic partners have strong conflicts of interest. In many moth–yucca interactions, oviposition leads to the failure of some ovules to develop normally. Here, we demonstrate that moth eggs almost always perish if they are inside these oviposition‐induced ‘damage zones’ of developing fruit. Moreover, because more ovipositions result both in larger damage zones and in higher proportions of eggs within damage zones, this source of mortality is strongly density‐dependent. Therefore, mortality of eggs in oviposition‐induced damage zones may be an important process for limiting seed consumption and regulating moth densities in many moth–yucca mutualisms.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.693
Threshold uncertainty score0.243

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.196 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcology LettersSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207